Partnership and collaboration: involving students in a service evaluation project Carol Sacchett, Janet Wood, UCL Speech and Language Therapy, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences Georgina Brown, Grace Burfield, Clare Foster MSc Speech and Language Sciences students Susan Houston Co-ordinator TALK

Post-stroke services: –evaluation and service user involvement Current project: –aims and methods –student involvement Evaluation: –benefits to students: Student perspective –benefits to organisation

Stroke services and evaluation Increasingly third sector organisations are taking on long term support role (RCSLT Stroke Survivor Survey 2008) Need for evaluation to demonstrate value (for money) Service user involvement: –increased focus on use of PROMS, service user experience and feedback –inclusion of people with communication difficulties (Clare & Cox 2003)

Aims: Provide a supportive environment in which to practise communication Improve QOL and rebuild confidence

TALK evaluation project AIM: To provide TALK with information that can be used to evidence impact and drive service development. METHODS: A.Qualitative evaluation of service by existing service users B.Outcome measurement study: quality of life and communication outcomes for new service users (Roberts 2012)

Procedure & roles WhatWho Ethics approvalCS/JW Recruitment 20 participants, purposive samplingSH, CS, students Informed consent Aphasia-friendly leaflet & verbal explanationStudents, service users (SU) Screening assessmentStudents, SU Data collection 1: Semi-structured interviews Development of questions Training in interviewing techniques for people with aphasia (Luck & Rose 2007) Completion of interviews Training in thematic analysis Thematic analysis of data CS,JW, SH, students CS, students Students, SU JW, students Students Data collection 2: Talking Mats interviews Training in Talking Mats (Murphy 1998) Development of symbols Completion of interviews CS, students Students Students, SU

Semi-structured interviews Based on grounded theory principles Three open questions: 1.Tell me about your time at TALK 2.Has coming to TALK made a difference to your life? 3.Is there anything you’d like to change about TALK? Thematic analysis of data for Qs 1 & 2 revealed 6 main themes: –inclusion/isolation –social interaction/camaraderie –perspective –support –purpose/motivation –progress/development

Talking Mats TM interviews Evidence-based, reliable procedure for eliciting views of people with aphasia (Clare & Cox 2003, Murphy et al 2005, Clarkson 2013) Symbols developed by students to represent all the issues raised in semi-structured interviews

Benefits to students Working in an investigative team to develop research questions and materials; Engagement in a “real-life” project which will make a difference; Better understanding of the role of third sector organisations and their partnership with clinical practice; Development of key professional skills in interviewing people with communication difficulties; Increased awareness of the impact of communication difficulties on people’s lives; Increased understanding of and skills in service evaluation

Straight from the horse’s mouth ….. Video clips

Susan Houston,TALK coordinator

Benefits to service users and organisation Service users: –Meaningful contribution to service evaluation and development –Sense of inclusion and feeling valued: “My views count” Organisation: –Independent evaluation of current service by service users –Evidence to influence potential funders –Information to guide service development Susan Houston: “We’re such a small charity with very limited resources …We’ve never had anything like this before. It’s good to have something more independent. We’d probably still not be doing outcome measurement if we hadn’t had this opportunity

Application to other disciplines Include opportunities for authentic, real-world learning Engage with local service user groups and/or service providers - let them set the agenda for research priorities Involve students in development of project Clear roles and responsibilities Train students in relevant methodologies/ techniques Trust students to rise to challenges

Clare, L. & Cox, S. (2003) Improving service approaches and outcomes for people with complex needs through consultation and involvement. Disability and Society, 18:7, Clarkson, K. (2013) Enabling people with communication impairments to provide feedback on service satisfaction – a reliability study. Unpublished MSc thesis, UCL Department of Health (2007) National Stroke Strategy. HMSO, London. Department of Health (2010) Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS. The Stationery Office Limited, London. Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party (2012) National Clinical Guideline for Stroke. 4th edition, Royal College of Physicians, London. Luck, A. & Rose, M. (2007) Interviewing people with aphasia: Insights into method adjustments from a pilot study. Aphasiology, 21:2, Murphy, J. (1998) Helping people with severe communication difficulties to express their views: A low tech tool. Communication Matters, 12:2, 10. Murphy, J. Tester, S. Hubbard, G. Downs, M. & MacDonald, C. (2005) Enabling frail older people with a communication difficulty to express their views: The use of Talking Mats as an interview tool. Health and Social Care in the Community, 13:2, Roberts, H. (2012) Evaluating the outcomes of a community-based support service for people with aphasia. Unpublished MSc thesis, UCL References